hi! i’m also in chicago & very into ibsen (i found your page late night scrolling in the doll’s house tags haha) & i feel like i’ve found a kindred spirit!! anyways i wanted to ask if you’ve seen any ibsen productions in the area lately, & what you’ve thought of them? i saw hedda @ theater wit not too long ago, ghosts @ the fine arts building, & have been hearing a lot about enemy of the people, too! personally i’ve had a lot of mixed feelings about the individual productions but i’m glad ibsen is having a moment at least
Oh wow hello!! First of all, this is so exciting. You've definitely found a kindred spirit.
I've seen that Hedda Gabler, but I thought I'd start with some broader thoughts about Chicago and Ibsen.
I may be biased, but I generally think Chicago does Ibsen better than New York. That difference is partly history, partly the theatrical ecosystem that's developed here. Chicago has a different industrial and social background, and a different class structure. I'd argue, in particular, that Chicago's upper class is pretty distinct from New York's.
Chicago's own history – how the city became what it is and how it was built – also fits really well with the Ibsen plays that lean more heavily into social critique. You could drop a lot of Ibsen plays into a Chicago setting, and it would feel almost too natural.
In performance, there's a clear stylistic split. On Broadway, you often get what I'd call icy Heddas, for example. These are portrayals that emphasize distance, aestheticized boredom, and a kind of refined, no-nonsense detachment. Chicago, by contrast, has a stronger instinct for "Midwestern nice." Chicagoans tend to be much less direct and more comfortable with passive aggression than the bluntness and abrasiveness often associated with New Yorkers.
Our theaters also have a strong ensemble tradition. The city has long been drawn to psychological realism and naturalistic acting, especially through companies like Steppenwolf, which helped define a style that is raw, intimate, and grounded in behavioral truth (whatever that is) rather than musicals and star-driven casting. It can make Shakespeare feel slightly rough around the edges sometimes, but for Ibsen, Strindberg, and Chekhov it's almost ideal.
Now, I did see Hedda Gabler at the Wit. I thought the lead did well, especially in the scenes with Judge Brack. Her performance was quick and energetic, and at times she reminded me a little of Cate Blanchett's Hedda in her movements. She was very much playing the part of the hostess, someone who knows she has a magnetic presence and deliberately exploits it.
At times, though, the performance felt a bit too icy. I don't respond strongly to icy Heddas as a general interpretive approach. There's a real difference between a Hedda who's controlled and repressed and one who simply comes across as emotionally flat, bored, or psychopathic from beginning to end.
The pacing was also very fast, probably too fast for my taste. At just over two hours, a classic Hedda Gabler is already highly economical and structurally tight. Cutting it never works for me. The play is already so economical, so carefully constructed and calibrated, that if you start cutting, you're sacrificing things you really can't afford to lose.
That said, I admired the production's use of color. It had a slightly expressionistic quality, maybe a bit overt in places, but I didn't find it obtrusive. It was clever.
On the subject of condensed adaptations, I don't know if you've seen the 90-minute Crime and Punishment, but I'm intrigued and planning to go.
I saw Hedda Gabler at the Den last year, and although the portrayal was more icy, I couldn't take my eyes off Hébert. At her best, she was nervous, dynamic, and angry.
As for Ghosts at the Fine Arts Center, are you referring to the reading they did with the psychoanalytic framing, or something else? I couldn't make it, but I heard it was a very intense exploration of the play through that lens.
I did see last year's production of Ghosts by the Gwydion Theater Company. It was fine, but ultimately a bit lifeless. Ghosts as a play is not lifeless at all.
I don't know whether you know this, but Ghosts had its world premiere at the Aurora Turner Hall in 1882, performed in the original Dano-Norwegian by Scandinavian immigrants!
As for An Enemy of the People, I'm very excited about that. I hear they consulted and were unsure of what to do with what came back. Anyway, this may be the Ibsen play best suited to a Chicago audience. It could resonate really well, given what the city is going through right now and the city's general spirit at this moment. I'd even go so far as to say it translates into an American civic context more cleanly than into a British one, though I know that's a slightly contentious take.
I also saw a production of The Seagull recently, and I should add that I really liked the recent Miss Julie at the Court. The design was beautiful, but beyond that, I found it genuinely gripping, even if many people seemed to consider it only moderately successful.
Looking ahead, I'm excited for Antigone, Uncle Vanya, Leopoldstadt, and Southern Rapture coming up, and Creditors next season.
vaporwave
pixelskylines
blakekathryn
theartofmadeline
turnnoffyourmind
